The embossed seal simply does not come out in a PDF scan.<quoted text>
Try this on for size and point out the lie.
There is NO copy of Obama's long form birth certificate with a raised embossed State seal issued by Hawaii DOH.
There is NO proof that a mistake happened in regards to Obama's fraudulent SSN.
What you got Poopoo stain?
How do we know that it exists? We know that Obama has a Hawaii birth certificate in several ways.
The first is the short-form birth certificate. It is generated by a clerk in the Hawaii DOH reading the information in the files and entering it in a computer form. For that to happen there has to be a document in the files. In Obama's case that happened back in 2007 (though it was not published until 2008) when Obama was only a candidate for president---long before he became the leading candidate, much less president. The clerk would have had to have been lying in 2007, and the confirmations by the Republican officials in 2008 would have to be lies as well.
Conclusion: There was certainly a Hawaii birth certificate in the files when Obama received his short form birth certificate in 2007 and when it was published in 2008 and when the officials confirmed it in 2008. They could of course all be lying, but why would they?
In addition, we know that Obama had a birth certificate in 1961 from the notices sent to the newspapers by the DOH in that year. We know that only the DOH could send those notices in three ways. First because the representative of the newspapers said so, second because the representative of the DOH said so and third because the section of the newspaper was called "Health Bureau Statistic"---which obviously meant that the facts in it came from the Health Bureau, the DOH. In 1961, the DOH was not allowed to issue birth certificates to children born outside of Hawaii, and it only sent birth notices to the papers for children born in Hawaii. Oh, and in the DOH was operating under Republican governor.
Some birthers claim that in 1961 Hawaii granted birth certificates to anyone whose relatives applied, but the officials in Hawaii have denied that was the case. They insist that the law in 1961 did not allow the DOH to issue a birth certificate that said "born in Honolulu (or any Hawaii location)" unless the child was actually born in that location and that there was evidence of it. And, you know, there are hundreds of thousands of people who were alive and living in Hawaii in 1961, and after that statement was made not one of them wrote to the newspapers or blogged that it was a lie.
So we know that Obama had a Hawaii birth certificate.
Your claim is that although this certificate exists and although the officials in Hawaii stated that they sent both the short form and the long form version of it to him, and despite a reporter having said that she felt the seal on it--that both the officials in Hawaii and the reporter are lying because the embossed seal does not show up on a PDF scan.
It should be obvious why an embossed seal does not show up on a scan. The light of the scanner is flat from the front and there is no light from the side that highlights the raised parts and lowered parts in the embossed seal. You claim that this is not so, that the scan would show it. Well, back up your claim with some evidence. Show a PDF scan of a Hawaii long form birth certificate that shows the raised seal.
Recently the Conservative secretary of state of Arizona asked Hawaii to confirm that Obama was born there and to confirm other facts on his published birth certificate. Hawaii did, and the Conservative secretary of state of Arizona accepted it as evidence that Obama was born in Hawaii, and ruled that Obama will be on the ballot in Arizona in November.